10 Writers’ Diets In the 1800s

Before 1847, vegetarians were called “Pythagoreans”. The Romantic idea that human beings should show compassion to nature and all her creatures was the basis of many a meat-free diet. It appears that the curious Victorian age was a perfect feeding ground for such ideas—and it seemed to be authors, in particular, who applied the Romantic outlook to their eating habits. As you’ll see, some of these diets were fairly bizarre:

10

Percy Shelley’s “Pythagoreanism”

A strong defender of injustice towards the lower classes, Percy Bysshe Shelley was inspired by Ritson to become a vegetarian. He did so in 1810, shortly before his time at Oxford. He worried about the transmigration of souls that was brought about by eating an animal, and became more and more enthralled by William Godwin and his bouts of vegetarianism.

During his first marriage to Harriet Westbrook, Shelley and his wife were proud “Pythagoreans”—and Shelley is often considered to be the first famous vegetarian of the modern age, even though he started eating meat again at a later point in his life.

9

Lord Byron’s Weight-Loss Program

Lord Byron had always struggled with his weight, which often suffered from extreme fluctuations due to his love of starchy foods. In an effort to combat this tendency by strength of will, Byron developed his own diet, which would go on to become the first real “celebrity diet” of the age.

During his university years, he lived on dry biscuits and water, or boiled potatoes in vinegar. He was convinced that vinegar aided digestion and weight loss, as it kept hunger pangs at bay and seemed to ensure sharpness of mind. Between 1806 and 1811, Byron managed to lose a total of seventy pounds (32kg).

If he were forced out of politeness to eat his fill at a dinner party, the poet would end his evening by taking a copious amount of magnesium. When Byron did not have to dress to impress, he would wear layers of wool to induce a sweat, and thereby add to his weight loss.

8

Lewis Carroll’s Wonderland Diet

It is a well-known fact that Lewis Carroll made a habit of smoking opium, and many are convinced that “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” are a less-than-subtle testament to this habit. In the Victorian age, many people used opium on a daily basis, which was one of the main reasons for infant mortality at the time. Carroll eventually began to supplement his diet with opium snacks as well, since eating the drug was often more practical than smoking it. It certainly wasn’t tasty—but the narcotic benefits were more important to him than the resulting bad breath.

7

Charles Dickens’ Apple a Day

Dickens was a man who knew his food, and this knowledge seeped through into his works—everything from his starveling diet in “Oliver Twist” to his obsession with baked apples. Dickens became convinced that eating one baked apple every day during sea travels would prevent sea sickness. He even thought that the lack of balance you experience upon reaching land could be resolved by consuming apples.

6

John Keats’ Anchovy a Day

The English poet John Keats was diagnosed with “mental exertion” in 1820, and his physician Dr. James Clark tried to heal his stomach pains and tuberculosis with a diet of a singly anchovy, plus one small piece of bread, every day. During his time following this diet—which was of course devoid of essential vitamins and minerals—Keats was also bled on a daily basis. Even though this was a very common treatment in that age, it is almost certain that his diet contributed to his weakness and worsening condition. Unsurprisingly, Keats found himself with no energy at all.

5

Charlotte Bronte’s Poverty Porridge

The Bronte sisters did not exactly grow up in the lap of luxury. If they were given any food at all on a particular day, it would be prepared in such a way as to render it almost inedible. There were times of near-starvation, and whole days which would provide their stomachs with nothing more than burnt porridge and a chunk of bread.

Charlotte eventually turned her experiences with food—or lack thereof—into a recurring theme in her books. Heroines would starve themselves as a sign of strength—the gist being that the body does not need fuel, so long as the heart and mind are strong.

4

David Livingstone’s Travel Diet

Explorer David Livingstone is known not only for his travels, but also for writing a fascinating field diary which covered his journey through Africa. He was used to good food at home, but during his trip he had to live on meals which, at their worst, consisted of water and bird seed. Hunger pangs took their toll, and Livingstone was often unable to participate in the exploration work due to a constant lack of energy. He lost a lot of weight as a result of his travel diet, and would often be forced to cut new notches into his belt.

3

Walt Whitman’s Breakfast

It’s said that Walt Whitman’s day did not really begin until he ate his favorite meat and oyster breakfast plate. The American poet and journalist relied on his meat for fuel and stamina, and oysters to keep his wit and mind sharp. It makes you wonder what he would have for dinner.

2

Charles Darwin’s Omelet

Darwin suffered from stomach acid problems, gout, and flatulence. He took “ten drops of muriatic acid twice a day”, and his daily diet would consist of a small portion of game or fowl, an egg omelet, and cheese. His doctor tried to persuade him to eat toast, and recommended eating more starchy foods such as potatoes. But Darwin loved the fact that his self-designed diet had reduced his vomiting, and would hear none of it.

1

Robert Louis Stevenson Liked It All

Robert Louis Stevenson enjoyed all food and drink—and he generally enjoyed it in excess. From his chain smoking habit to his constant consumption of strong coffee and alcohol, he found it difficult to quit his addictions. Quite the opposite to Darwin, Stevenson enjoyed a diet high in cholesterol and carbs, and suffered from repetitive bouts of meningitis. His smoking and coffee-drinking sped up his blood pressure and heart rate, which (combined with a diet rich in cholesterol) did him no favors.

Comments

Interesting list. However I very much doubt that the leading cause of infant deaths in Victorian England was opium use. I suppose I could go and look it up, but it seems to me that there were so many diseases waiting to carry a child off that opium use would have been low on the list.

I also find it a bit alarming that RLS suffered frequent bouts of meningitis. Meningitis caused by bacteria is usually fatal if untreated, and viral meningitis should only occur once. Surely it must have been something else that he suffered from, perhaps something that was misdiagnosed as meningitis. Perhaps some of the Listverse community with medical knowledge can either correct me, or enlighten us (probably both!).

I found the frequent bouts of meningitis to be alarming too, considering the severity of the disease. So I wikied it and, according to Wiki, it was more likely to be Bronchiectasis or Sarcoidosis, though, originally, Tuberculosis was suspected. Any one of those seems more plausible than ‘frequent bouts of meningitis’ especially as RLS had inherited a tendency towards coughs and fevers, which worsened when he moved into a damp, chilly house when he was an infant.

I know Kate, there were a lot of drugs used then that are now illegal, such as cocaine. Here’s an interesting paper in which this issue is discussed. The main cause of infant and child deaths was scarlet fever. In fact, all of the main causes of death are illnesses which we rarely see in the West thanks to vaccination programmes. But let’s not start that debate!

Evidently whenever someone expresses an opinion a moderator (no names) doesn’t agree with, said moderator makes sure to comment on the opponent’s intellect or something related to it. You know, people ARE allowed to dislike lists, that’s what the comment section is for – discussion. I have been visiting Listverse for a couple of years now and I love it here, truly do, apart from having to read from people with a head too big for their own good.
As for the list – an interesting enough read, I enjoyed it.

Really? Someone who doesn’t care about a list yet manages to care enough to comment about said list only to confess his ignorance about said list because he never actually read the list doesn’t warrant an opinion from someone else (Mod or not) on their foolishness? So what did he in fact “add” to the discussion?

He commented on the topic, which he didn’t find interesting. Surely this is also feedback? Isn’t it important for mods to know which lists get praised, and which leave people bored? At least three people thought the list was boring, in one case too boring to read. Still a goddamn opinion. Frater himself mentioned that some topics didn’t prove to be successful – how do you think he figured that out? What he added to discussion, was that he personally didn’t care for the topic on which the list was written, and that, I am guessing, he would prefer a different topic to be covered. At least four people liked his comment, so that brings it to several readers who weren’t impressed with the list. I repeat that in my opinion, ALL feedback is important, as long as it is relevant.

Sorry no, not all feedback is important. If you can’t even be bothered to read the list, and then dare to make a comment relating to the quality of something you haven’t read, your feedback is not important. Many topics don’t sound interesting but prove to be.

He did not comment on the quality of the list, though. His comment was valid.
Personally, I thought the subject sounded interesting, but the research and writing were well below what I hoped for. The very first sentence of the Keats entry is in error, and the fact that Keats died at 26 would certainly affect our conclusions about his diet. The RLS entry had an error or two, as well. And a couple of the entries do not seem to have much to do with diet as such.

Sure. He couldn’t be bothered to read the list because the topic doesn’t interest him. I can relate, I skip some lists because no matter how well written and informative they are, well, I just couldn’t care less about certain topics. He expressed an opinion, his personal one. It is entirely possible I misunderstood him, however I will repeat myself – all he did was comment on the topic. Nothing else. Evidently “no offense” part was overlooked and some people seemed to take it personally.

Now that’s interesting. I had always thought of ‘I could care less’ as a sort of street argot.
Surely it’s the other way around. If you say ‘I could care less’, then it must mean that you still care, but you have the possibility of caring less. Whereas if you say ‘I couldn’t care less’, surely it means that you already don’t care and therefore you could not possibly care less than you already do.

Ah ha. Thank you. Very interesting. I’m a bit WWW fan, so I should have gone there to look myself.
Perhaps another list for someone – 10 sayings that have lost their meaning in translation, or something like that!

Maybe you ought to take your own advice. “I couldn’t care less” is the correct form. “I could care less” evolved later, and implies the opposite of what the phrase intends. Why bother trying to correct someone, when you haven’t taken the time to ensure that you’re right? You just sound like a pompous idiot.

I’m with Charles Dickens, I eat at least one apple a day – I do like the taste and texture, but it is also a great substitute for chewing gum! Next time you get self-concious about your breath, eat one and you will stay nice and fresh for hours. Chewing gum has nothing on apples.

What an interesting list! I had no idea about most of these diets, so it was all good for me. The habits of writers and artists I am particularly fond of always intrigues me.
Sad about the Brontes. I know they weren’t rich, but had no idea they were so destitute.
Not surprised about Whitman. He had a rather full life (read up on his nursing duties during the American civil war) so fueling up first thing was good.
Anyway, I loved the list. Thanks.

I think the title is misleading (along with the Charlotte Bronte entry). We know Charlotte ate poorly while she was boarding at that awful school (the school she attended when young – not the school is Belgium), but at home they would have eaten better than the average family in Haworth. I think it’s rather disgusting to insinuate that a child who was being effectively starved by school powers was on a burnt porridge “diet”.

People can have meningitis more than once, and even several times. Meningitis is an infection that can find a way into the spinal cord meninges, which then travels upward and infects the space between the skull and brain. I’ve had it three times, and I have read of a man that gets it (viral) every time he has an outbreak of herpes, which is a couple of times a year for years. My doctor told me that some people tend to get recurrent infections, and meningitis is no exception. The vaccine protects against only certain types of agents that cause meningitis, but any bacteria or virus that gets into the meninges can cause havoc. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. The pain is excruciating.

You’re saying that Carroll was addicted to opium, but I did some research and, even though opium use was very common at the time, there is no real evidence that he did. He kept diaries, but there’s no register of opium use (since it was so common, there was no reason for him to be ashamed enough not to write about it in his diaries).

Like I said, opium use was very common at the time and I do believe that book reflects the society Carroll lived in. So the fact that he (might have) talked about drugs, it doesn’t necessarily means he used them.

Lewis Carroll may have done Opium; HOWEVER this list is severely inaccurate; he did NOT write AiW/etc. under its effects. Much of the story is political satire and is much more logical if you pay enough attention to it.
My evidence: http://www.alice-in-wonderland.net/alice11.html#2
Please try to find more sources before just rattling off false information.